About this blog

Incoming BYTEScontains highly variable subject matter including commentary on the mundane, the extraordinary and even controversial issues. At Incoming BYTESwe want YOU to think...if you dare...

Followers

Monday, March 21, 2011

Time to Declare War: On Nuclear Energy?

A blinding flash of light....

With a background in chemistry, I have never believed that using radioactive, unstable dangerous materials for production of electricity was a good idea. Recent nuclear events in Japan, the worst nuclear development since Chernobyl, once again confirm that nuclear energy is one of the world's most dangerous applications of scientific knowledge, and perhaps one of the worst applications of modern technology. In the extreme, in total failure, nuclear energy is ultimately a one-way ticket to the termination of humanity. It is bad enough that the globe can be destroyed many times over with existing stockpiles of nuclear weapons fitfully declared "necessary for defense and M.A.D." ; the insanity and sublime reality of mutual assured destruction; --- but are nuclear reactors really necessary for the production of electricity? No. Are there other viable options? Yes. Wind and solar energy already supply most of the electrical power used in Germany. If Germany can do it, why can't we? Can any power utility "authority" operating nuclear generating stations ever offer even the slightest guarantee that a nuclear reactor will not eventually fail, spewing radiation in to the environment for thousands of miles, contaminating food, water, and land? NO. Has the nuclear industry made sound decisions in the past? No.The Pickering nuclear reactor in Pickering, Ontario is built close to, or upon a known geological fault line and has suffered "minor leaks". Only a couple of days ago, an earthquake was recorded between Montreal and Ottawa. Should our readers be foolish enough to believe a serious earthquake cannot, at some point in the future, ravage the Pickering reactor? Hearings in Ontario are scheduled and taking place decide to build more reactors at Darlington. Has Ontario learned nothing from the Japanese disaster? Food and water is already contaminated for 60 or 80 kilometers from the Fukushima disaster, and it is nowhere NEAR under control. Hundreds of miles of the Ukraine was contaminated by Chernobyl--and will be for centuries. With wind technology, solar energy, and natural gas generating stations possible, the use of dangerous nuclear reactors is simply inexcusable, reckless, and cannot be justified. Safety of nuclear reactors cannot be guaranteed by any "nuclear authority" regardless how "reassuring" they may be. There is no safe way to dispose of radioactive waste, which remains dangerous for many centuries. Imagine a similar nuclear disaster in Southern Ontario. Ten million people. Out-of-control reactors. Do not allow any person to tell you that a catastrophe can not happen, because clearly, they can. If it can happen in Japan, it can happen in Ontario. Accidents are bound to occur. Equipment will fail, leaks will occur, and radioactive material WILL be released to the environment. The nuclear industry has already proven that accidents and defects and "events" can happen. Why take such foolish chances with the lives of millions of people ? Why spend MORE billions on defective, dangerous technology?

It is not too late to stop North America's nuclear madness. Let us now do the RIGHT thing for the environment. Say NO to Nuclear reactors, say NO to expansion of Darlington, and say NO to the greedy politicians, the nuclear power authority, and the nuclear industry that has only one thing in mind-- profit.

to celebrate the vernal equinox--i send in moral support to the concerned politicians who are willing to educate themselves about the danger of playing with radioactive toys.

it is obvious that no parent with full mental capacity would allow their family to build any structure on top of a known fault--oh wait--they do, in California, in Nevada, man builds his progeny's future where profit is more important than health.

the very same billions which finance nuclear energy--would keep the same number of people employed under much much safer circumstances in solar and wind power...APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY NOW!

One of the pointed questions that must be asked is "How is it that these individual companies and nuclear associations are allowed to freely endanger the lives of MILLIONS of people based on "best-guess performance" of equipment that is eventually guaranteed to fail, even under optimal conditions? We DO need appropriate technology NOW, and it is NOT appropriate to use Nuclear reactors when safe technology is available.

tried to send a longer comment yesterday, it was rejected--so to sum it up--the very billions which are allocated to extension and expansion of highly dangerous technology--need to be rerouted to saner-safer solar and wind power which has been researched-concentrated and effective in recent decades.the tax payers and consumers must demand the healthier product for their dollars.

@ Nadine, I don't know if there's a limit to the length of comments or not, I'll try and find out. I have to agree with you..the billions for re-fitting old Nuclear plants and building new ones would be FAR smarter placed into research and cleaner alternatives. If Germany can do it, why can't we?? Consumers MUST demand a healthier product for their dollars.

You are Visitor #

Subscribe To

Follow by Email

About Me

I am a freelance writing professional and published author. I write in Northwestern Ontario on the north shore of Lake Superior. I write fiction, short stories, children's books, poetry, technical, how-to articles, and other articles of interest. I want to challenge people to think for themselves -and be proactive in their own lives. I also blog at www.incomingbytes.com

Deals

7x7 Link Award Winner:

7x7 Link Award

IncomingBytes.com

How about This?

PRIVACY POLICY

Privacy Notice to visitors to Incoming BYTES:

Visitors to this blog should be aware that third-party vendors, such as Google, may use cookies on blog pages and websites to collect data and promote ads based on individual user experience. Google, certain associates and partners, may promote ads based on data collected on individual visits to this website as well to other sites linked to this website. Users that prefer not to allow Google or other third parties to install cookies on their computer while visiting this site, similar, connected or linked websites and blogs, may opt out of the use of cookies. Users choosing to opt out may do so at the http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html page. Users may also opt out of the installation of third-party cookies at the Network Advertising Initiative opt-out page at http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp